LaMichael James was a Niner (CUT!)

Originally posted by taney71:
I doing a prediction here and saying James doesn't play against Green Bay. I don't see ourcoaches having much confidence in a rookie RB. Plus we have great RB depth

GB has a weak defense, James' speed is more of an asset then you think. If Dobbs is active next week then Garret Celek (should he still be on our 53) will be inactive and James will be active.

Originally posted by sfout:

Originally posted by taney71:
I doing a prediction here and saying James doesn't play against Green Bay. I don't see ourcoaches having much confidence in a rookie RB. Plus we have great RB depth

GB has a weak defense, James' speed is more of an asset then you think. If Dobbs is active next week then Garret Celek (should he still be on our 53) will be inactive and James will be active.

we cant use a 6th of the active roster on RB's....somebody will be inactive

Originally posted by jreff22:

Originally posted by sfout:

Originally posted by taney71:
I doing a prediction here and saying James doesn't play against Green Bay. I don't see ourcoaches having much confidence in a rookie RB. Plus we have great RB depth

GB has a weak defense, James' speed is more of an asset then you think. If Dobbs is active next week then Garret Celek (should he still be on our 53) will be inactive and James will be active.

we cant use a 6th of the active roster on RB's....somebody will be inactive

it'll probably be a choice between jacobs and james. Jacobs might not even be active, that is still not a sure thing that he will come back for week 1.
2 QBs
5 RB/FB(jacobs could be out)
3 TE(including dobbs)
7 OL(davis and kilgore as the active backups)
4 WR(ginn will probably be out and jenkins might still be inactive)
thats 21
6 DL
8 LB
4 CB
4 SS
thats 22

plus our 3 specialists is 46. Even if we sign Haggans today, haralson might not be active because of his injury so that would only mean 7 LBs active. giving us the ability to have either 6 active WRs or 6 active RB/FB. The entire premise of all of our offseason moves was to be able to have any number of these 12 players active on gameday, giving us the ability to stay fresh in all phases of our offense.

Again we could go with 7 LBs because Dobbs could be a 3rd down pass rush specialist.

Originally posted by sfout:
it'll probably be a choice between jacobs and james. Jacobs might not even be active, that is still not a sure thing that he will come back for week 1.
2 QBs
5 RB/FB(jacobs could be out)
3 TE(including dobbs)
7 OL(davis and kilgore as the active backups)
4 WR(ginn will probably be out and jenkins might still be inactive)
thats 21
6 DL
8 LB
4 CB
4 SS
thats 22

plus our 3 specialists is 46. Even if we sign Haggans today, haralson might not be active because of his injury so that would only mean 7 LBs active. giving us the ability to have either 6 active WRs or 6 active RB/FB. The entire premise of all of our offseason moves was to be able to have any number of these 12 players active on gameday, giving us the ability to stay fresh in all phases of our offense.

Again we could go with 7 LBs because Dobbs could be a 3rd down pass rush specialist.

Or We could go w/3 OLBs every week (Hagans inactive if Haralson is healthy) It's pretty rare to lose 2 OLBs in one game. Even if that happened, we could stay mostly in Nikle, w/Dobbs as one of the outside passrushers (have even seen them bounce Cowboy to the utside, replacing w/RJF or Tuku).

Originally posted by WRATHman44:
Or We could go w/3 OLBs every week (Hagans inactive if Haralson is healthy) It's pretty rare to lose 2 OLBs in one game. Even if that happened, we could stay mostly in Nikle, w/Dobbs as one of the outside passrushers (have even seen them bounce Cowboy to the utside, replacing w/RJF or Tuku).

exactly and I honestly think that this is what is going to happen.

Well, if James does play then they probably deactivate Dixon for the game. It will be interesting to see how changes develops over the course of the season. I hope the coaches use James in the right situations and develop him as a complement to a future 49er backfield with Hunter and him.

I wrote a piece when we signed James, and guessed that he would be alex's go to guy on 3rd down , split wide of alex, with either a pass or lateral, and then let him dance thru the opponents D. I specifically DID NOT see that during the PS, but I also saw no practices. So here it is:

Prediction: LaMichael will be split wide of alex on virtually all 3rd down plays, and will dance thru the D virtually every time for a 1st down. Same goes for in the RZ. Now either i am really wrong, or Coach H has not shown this because we open up with GB. I think this is his plan to surprise and defeat GB. Before the draft, I had us at 11-5 with a loss to GB. Now i am betting La Michael helps us beat GB on third and long or short and also for scores in RZ. We will know within a few days if this is the way Coach plans to use him. Prior to season, he was used almost exclusively between tackles. I don't think that's where Coach uses him for our opener and beyond. I also don't think anyone can stop that kid wide.

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:
I wrote a piece when we signed James, and guessed that he would be alex's go to guy on 3rd down , split wide of alex, with either a pass or lateral, and then let him dance thru the opponents D. I specifically DID NOT see that during the PS, but I also saw no practices. So here it is:

Prediction: LaMichael will be split wide of alex on virtually all 3rd down plays, and will dance thru the D virtually every time for a 1st down. Same goes for in the RZ. Now either i am really wrong, or Coach H has not shown this because we open up with GB. I think this is his plan to surprise and defeat GB. Before the draft, I had us at 11-5 with a loss to GB. Now i am betting La Michael helps us beat GB on third and long or short and also for scores in RZ. We will know within a few days if this is the way Coach plans to use him. Prior to season, he was used almost exclusively between tackles. I don't think that's where Coach uses him for our opener and beyond. I also don't think anyone can stop that kid wide.

When we drafted him, people thought it was competition for Hunter, but it's not. LMJ is very good in space. We will screen the heck out of him, along with reverses, sweeps. This is how our offense is built.

He sure has an interesting taste in cars

http://www.nfl.com/videos/san-francisco-49ers/0ap2000000068196/Rollin-With-LaMichael-James

Could be complete wishful thinking, but maybe we'll use him as an X-factor later in the season.....very bummed about this pick.

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
Could be complete wishful thinking, but maybe we'll use him as an X-factor later in the season.....very bummed about this pick.

i'm bummed about him and jenkins not seein ANY playing time

you'd think a 34 point lead in NY might give them some action

Originally posted by DonnieDarko:

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:

Could be complete wishful thinking, but maybe we'll use him as an X-factor later in the season.....very bummed about this pick.

i'm bummed about him and jenkins not seein ANY playing time

you'd think a 34 point lead in NY might give them some action

Yeah if only you could activate your inactive players during the game.

Originally posted by DatNyjerSireez:

Originally posted by DonnieDarko:

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
Could be complete wishful thinking, but maybe we'll use him as an X-factor later in the season.....very bummed about this pick.

i'm bummed about him and jenkins not seein ANY playing time

you'd think a 34 point lead in NY might give them some action

Yeah if only you could activate your inactive players during the game.

They mentioned something about player development so we will have to wait and see

Alot of people are down on the draft because james and jenkins arent active on sundays. Were deep in those positions right now. Somethings gotta give. Think of it like having a qb sit on the bench a year or two to learn. James is in the same mold as hunter and we know hunter is going to get the nod.

La Mike's gonna be alright.

As others have mentioned, all of our starters are so solid, especially at the running back position, that no rookie we could've picked would have cracked the starting lineup.

I honestly think it's great that we have enough depth to sit both James and Jenkins.

We really won't know how these picks pan out for a few years though.

If they still aren't playing a big role on the offense then we can call em busts and lynch Baalke.